[ScottW]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

Harry Lavo wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
oups.com...

ScottW wrote:

snip


Check out all the MoFi Beatle Box sets on e-bay.
I see one with a single bid at $800....suspicious.

It sounds to me like that's possibly a shill bid, unless it's sealed.
Even then that seems high. But crazy stuff happens on eBay all the
time.


If it is only one bid, then that bid will be the initial bid the seller set.
It won't go higher unless there is a second bid.

Right, but if I set a very high price and then bid on it to make it
look like it's a reasonable price, or that somebody is actually
interested at that price, I'd still call that a shill bid. Maybe
"shill" isn't the correct term?

Looks like a bid to me. The bidder and seller have different
IDs. I see lots of stuff with no bids indicated and a starting
bid price. If the seller set a reserve...will the first bidders
offer run up to the reserve?

Here's the item
http://cgi.ebay.com/BEATLES-MOBILE-F...QQcmdZViewItem

http://tinyurl.com/yz8teu

ScottW

[ScottW]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
oups.com...
ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Sander deWaal" wrote in message

Stewart Pinkerton: a Krell, and several other analogue
stuff.

Why is it snake oil?

Why would you buy a Krell for several thousands more than a Parasound
or a QSC?

Or does the Krell sound better? If no, then why wouldn't they be
considered "snake oil"?

If this is about Krell's ability to handle very low impedances, and if
the QSC and Parasound cannot operate with similar low impedances, then
aren't the QSC and Parasound not very well designed?

I'd say not as well designed. But how many amps "need" to be able to drive a
1
ohm load?

My point was to show old Arns his insanity and his inherent hypocrisy,
not to criticize Krell or anybody who owns one.

I have no problem with people buying Krell, or even Boulder for that
matter, if that's what suits them.:-)

Anyway, thats why I bought my KSA-150. I bought it used..unheard..on solid
recommendation that there isn't a finer SS amp to be had and it will drive
any
speaker. I knew I was going to be looking for new speakers and I wanted an
amp
that had no limitations. If it sounded better driving a benign load speaker
well, I guess that would have been a plus, but driving the Legacy's ....I
can't
say it does. But while some hi-end gear might get credit it isn't due, I
also
know some stuff that isn't in favor gets disrespect it doesn't deserve. I
think
people often lump Yamaha gear in one big pile of crappy mass market stuff
which
is grossly unfair. When I say I have a Mitsu linear TT, most think of the
POS
LT-5 and assume all Mitsu tables are likewise bad. People don't give my C-60
preamp any credit but I haven't heard a better SS preamp. It simply performs
IMO. So it all works both ways AFAIAC. At the end of the day, how much I
paid
for it...too little or too much, isn't what I'm thinking about when I turn it
on.

I agree with you. Further, I would add how much or how little that you
paid for your gear is none of my (or anybody else's) business. Nor is
it my business what brands you chose. If it helps you enjoy listening
to music, then it's perfect. Music is, after all, what it's all about
IMO.

I agree...but we all know that everyone on occasion likes to brag.
Some people like to brag about how much they spent and others
like to brag about how little they spent. I'm inclined toward the
latter.


I'm actually on the "borg" side cables and wire, for example.

Me too. Unfortunately many people who are on the other side think they're
duty bound to convince you they're right....you know...like liberals and
politics . The shop where I got my Quads started pushing cables
on me...and I flat told 'em, "I'm not a cable guy". The owners reply, "We'll
change that." He's a nice guy, but now its really hard to talk to him.

But
if you want to buy Tara Zero (and if it doesn't mean that you aren't
feeding your kids as a result), that's fine with me.

What are the odds that old Arns will ever agree with you, do you figure?

Ignore the usenet shtick and he's probably a lot closer to this
position than you realize.

ScottW

[dizzy]

Jenn wrote:

dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

No bias in your "childish statement" attack? LOL

Correct.

Wrong, obviously.

Most people would agree that answering a simple question how
you did is childish.

Most would agree that your question was stupid.

They would? I'll remember that if you ever have the curiosity to ask a
question about music.

It would only be fair turn-about, Jenn, if I were to, say, first
spout-off extensively regarding music, and then show that I didn't
even know what a scale was.

When did I "spout-off extensively" regarding the technical aspects of
audio?

You've spouted about sound quality from audio equipment, Jenn.

Arny simply gave a straightforward answer. I
appreciated that.

Great. You and Arny are real tight now, eh?

Many people judge each situation individually. Evidently, you don't.
You're entitled, I guess.

I recognize a fair-weather friend what I see one, Jenn.

Again, you're not making sense. Arny gave me a straight forward answer,
as opposed to you.

No "again" about it, Jenn. If you'd think harder you'd know that.

Most would agree that your statement is childish,

Most would agree you're an idiot.

Well, that ends this "discussion",

Looks like you can dish it out but cannot take it, Jenn.

I don't "dish out" things such as calling people on this board idiots.

So "childish" is okay, while "idiot" is not, eh Jenn?

You really don't understand the difference, do you?

I understand the two words are not synonymous, Jenn.

You really don't understand the difference is not significant to my
point, do you?

If you wish to do that, fine, but I have no desire to continue such a
discussion.

So you say, Jenn.

except for this observation:

You're going to "observe" a typo, Jenn? How childish.

"Think harder" Dizzy. That's not what I'm observing.

The fact is you did observe my typo, Jenn. If your real point was to
whine about something else, your observation of the typo, not
surprisingly, distracted from it. In short, it appears that your
communications skills need work Jenn.

LOL I'll do you a favor and explain this to you so you can avoid
twisting in the wind any further.

LOL the irony...

You commented on someone else's
intelligence, then misspelled a word. I was commenting on the fact that
this happens so often on the boards that it ought to be given a name,
not on your misspelling.

Whatever, Jenn. Your comment diverted from the point of the
discussion. Why not let the typo go? They happen all the time and
are not that interesting.

I'll do you a favor and explain THE REAL POINT to you so you can avoid
twisting in the wind any further.

Serious people, who spend serious time developing serious experiments
like ABX, do not generally have fatal flaws in their theory that any
idiot can shoot-down in 10 seconds by asking "why not? what are you
afraid of?"

You see, they realize that a theory can be shot-down with only one
counter-example. They spend time thinking of ways by which their
theory may be attacked. They attempt to close all possible attack
vectors. Having artificial restrictions like you can't "listen to the
same passage of music for as long a period as one wishes to" would
make their theory trivially attackable.

THAT is why I thought your question was rather foolish.

[Harry Lavo]

"ScottW" wrote in message
...

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

Harry Lavo wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
message
oups.com...

ScottW wrote:

snip


Check out all the MoFi Beatle Box sets on e-bay.
I see one with a single bid at $800....suspicious.

It sounds to me like that's possibly a shill bid, unless it's sealed.
Even then that seems high. But crazy stuff happens on eBay all the
time.


If it is only one bid, then that bid will be the initial bid the seller
set.
It won't go higher unless there is a second bid.

Right, but if I set a very high price and then bid on it to make it
look like it's a reasonable price, or that somebody is actually
interested at that price, I'd still call that a shill bid. Maybe
"shill" isn't the correct term?

Looks like a bid to me. The bidder and seller have different
IDs. I see lots of stuff with no bids indicated and a starting
bid price. If the seller set a reserve...will the first bidders
offer run up to the reserve?

Here's the item
http://cgi.ebay.com/BEATLES-MOBILE-F...QQcmdZViewItem

http://tinyurl.com/yz8teu

Scott, here's how it works.

Seller sets the price...say $800, with "0" bids.

First bidder bids $1000....but with no other bidder, bid gets entered at
$800 (the seller minimum) and "1" bid recorded.

If a second bidder bids, let's say $900, his bid gets entered at $900, and
the first bidder "overbids" autiomatically at $910.00.

At that point, the screen says "$910.00, 3 bids" (first bid, second bid,
overbid (third) bid).

The first bidder may or may not be a shill. Listers don't "shill" using
their own ID...that would be a dead giveaway. If they are going to shill,
they either set up another account using slightly different "owner"
information, or better yet (or really, worse yet) this is usually done in
conjunction with a companion who is the one placing the "shill" bid.
Sometimes, unscrupulous sellers team up to "shill" one another.

BTW, I own one of these "limited edition" sets. Assumed it was worth
something...now I know how approximatley how much. In my early eBay days, I
put a Lionel train set up for sale...the large Fairbanks-Morse locomotive I
knew was worth a couple of hundred bucks. Figured I'd be luck to get 500
for the set. Turns out the (to me) plain old orange box car was the rarest
of those ever made, and the entire set ended up going for $1700. Sometimes
you get lucky.

[ScottW]

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
. ..

"ScottW" wrote in message
...

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

Harry Lavo wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
oups.com...

ScottW wrote:

snip


Check out all the MoFi Beatle Box sets on e-bay.
I see one with a single bid at $800....suspicious.

It sounds to me like that's possibly a shill bid, unless it's sealed.
Even then that seems high. But crazy stuff happens on eBay all the
time.


If it is only one bid, then that bid will be the initial bid the seller
set.
It won't go higher unless there is a second bid.

Right, but if I set a very high price and then bid on it to make it
look like it's a reasonable price, or that somebody is actually
interested at that price, I'd still call that a shill bid. Maybe
"shill" isn't the correct term?

Looks like a bid to me. The bidder and seller have different
IDs. I see lots of stuff with no bids indicated and a starting
bid price. If the seller set a reserve...will the first bidders
offer run up to the reserve?

Here's the item
http://cgi.ebay.com/BEATLES-MOBILE-F...QQcmdZViewItem

http://tinyurl.com/yz8teu

Scott, here's how it works.

Seller sets the price...say $800, with "0" bids.

First bidder bids $1000....but with no other bidder, bid gets entered at $800
(the seller minimum) and "1" bid recorded.

If a second bidder bids, let's say $900, his bid gets entered at $900, and the
first bidder "overbids" autiomatically at $910.00.

At that point, the screen says "$910.00, 3 bids" (first bid, second bid,
overbid (third) bid).

So I guess the sellers can set a min opening bid and a reserve
which aren't necessarily equal.


The first bidder may or may not be a shill. Listers don't "shill" using their
own ID...that would be a dead giveaway. If they are going to shill, they
either set up another account using slightly different "owner" information, or
better yet (or really, worse yet) this is usually done in conjunction with a
companion who is the one placing the "shill" bid. Sometimes, unscrupulous
sellers team up to "shill" one another.

BTW, I own one of these "limited edition" sets. Assumed it was worth
something...now I know how approximatley how much.

Ok, thanks for the explanation.

I've got a Japanese import box set. The mo-fi box is much better constructed.
Mine fell apart...but the records are great .
Still the bidding pattern is suspect as there appears to be similar offerings
for less.

ScottW

[Harry Lavo]

"ScottW" wrote in message
...

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
. ..

"ScottW" wrote in message
...

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
message ups.com...

Harry Lavo wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
message
oups.com...

ScottW wrote:

snip


Check out all the MoFi Beatle Box sets on e-bay.
I see one with a single bid at $800....suspicious.

It sounds to me like that's possibly a shill bid, unless it's
sealed.
Even then that seems high. But crazy stuff happens on eBay all the
time.


If it is only one bid, then that bid will be the initial bid the
seller set.
It won't go higher unless there is a second bid.

Right, but if I set a very high price and then bid on it to make it
look like it's a reasonable price, or that somebody is actually
interested at that price, I'd still call that a shill bid. Maybe
"shill" isn't the correct term?

Looks like a bid to me. The bidder and seller have different
IDs. I see lots of stuff with no bids indicated and a starting
bid price. If the seller set a reserve...will the first bidders
offer run up to the reserve?

Here's the item
http://cgi.ebay.com/BEATLES-MOBILE-F...QQcmdZViewItem

http://tinyurl.com/yz8teu

Scott, here's how it works.

Seller sets the price...say $800, with "0" bids.

First bidder bids $1000....but with no other bidder, bid gets entered at
$800 (the seller minimum) and "1" bid recorded.

If a second bidder bids, let's say $900, his bid gets entered at $900,
and the first bidder "overbids" autiomatically at $910.00.

At that point, the screen says "$910.00, 3 bids" (first bid, second bid,
overbid (third) bid).

So I guess the sellers can set a min opening bid and a reserve
which aren't necessarily equal.

Yes the "shill" will often hang in for a round of bidding or two (automatic)
just to get things off to a fast start.


The first bidder may or may not be a shill. Listers don't "shill" using
their own ID...that would be a dead giveaway. If they are going to
shill, they either set up another account using slightly different
"owner" information, or better yet (or really, worse yet) this is usually
done in conjunction with a companion who is the one placing the "shill"
bid. Sometimes, unscrupulous sellers team up to "shill" one another.

BTW, I own one of these "limited edition" sets. Assumed it was worth
something...now I know how approximatley how much.

Ok, thanks for the explanation.

I've got a Japanese import box set. The mo-fi box is much better
constructed.
Mine fell apart...but the records are great .
Still the bidding pattern is suspect as there appears to be similar
offerings
for less.

Actually, there appear to be six or seven, and all but two are up around
$800. The even numbers do look a bit funny...on the other hand, there may
be enough of a market for the price to have been established, or there may
be a couple of bidders willing to pay that much for a christmas gift (given
the talk about the set on the various Beatle "Love" threads). The ones that
are lower are still days away from ending, and often the price will shoot up
to "market" with last minute bids.

[Arny Krueger]

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message


That will make Arny furious, and we
will get another month of ABX'sms.

Grow up, Harry. If it wasn't for Ludo and you whining all the time about
ABX, it would be mentioned here far less.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in
message


In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:


Again, when a listener presses a button on an ABX box,
the actual change may be A to A, A to B, B to A, or B to
B. If the change does not involve X, then it is very
critical that the listener know exactly what the
switchover involved. If the change involves X, then it
is very critical that the listener not know what the
switchover involved, except due to audible differences
between A and B.

Makes sense. I still don't buy into the need or
practicality of it on the consumer end, but what you
wrote makes sense.

It's all about what the consumer wants to know for himself based on his own
experiences. If the consumer doesn't want to hear the purported difference
for himself, then there's no need for any kind of listening test at all. If
the consumer does want to know if he can hear the purported difference or
not, then he needs to perform the test.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

George M. Middius wrote:
paul packer said:

And as usual, you can't comment without snot.

Improve your batting average Jenn, and you'll lose your reputation for being
little miss can't get audio right.

Gee, what did she just say, Arnie? Read her sentence again so you
won't illustrate it again so well in the future.

Can you imagine The Tape if Turdy had been screeching at a woman?

You have a tape of Arns 'discussing' audio with his wife?

[George M. Middius]

The Krooborg begs to differ.

That will make Arny furious, and we
will get another month of ABX'sms.

Grow up, Harry. If it wasn't for Ludo and you whining

There's that old Krooglish bug again, Turdy. The correct human word is
jeering, or perhaps sneering. After all these years, it's surprising to me
that Dr. Kroomacher still hasn't designed a Human Language Interface Module
for you.

all the time about ABX, it would be mentioned here far less.

It's a good thing you said "here", presumably meaning RAO. If you left it
open-ended, the scope would include your prayers, and that's a gulf we
could never get across.





--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

ScottW wrote:
So I guess the sellers can set a min opening bid and a reserve
which aren't necessarily equal.

That's indeed true. The difference is that there is a fee based on your
listing price (say a few cents to a couple of bucks), with or without a
reserve.

If you list a reserve, however, you pay the other sellers fees as
though you actually sold it for that amount whether you got any bids or
not, plus the listing fee. If you list it without a reserve and don't
sell it, you're only out the listing fee.

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
Sander deWaal wrote:

"ScottW" said:


Yesterday I said in this thread...
" I don't have a "big Sony" but my big Krell didn't sound any different
to me than my Yamaha on my Legacys ...but those are very similar amps at
their core."


Let alone that I think of you as an audio borg (unless you sold your
Quads) ;-)


My apologies... given the above quote you can see why I thought
you must be referring to my comment.


Sorry, but I hadn't seen it.
Newsfeed is very unreliable recently.


Come to think of it, Pinkerton didn't compare his Krell to a Yamaha,
either.
It was a Parasound, IIRC.


I thought Pinkerton always felt his Krell was needed to drive his
Apogees.


One would think so, it would be my first amp of choice as well.
But IIRC, he maintained he didn't hear a difference.

That says something for that "cheap Parasound" (of course, almost
everything designed by John Curl is sounding good and buit to last).

Wasn't it an Audiolab?

Stephen

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

Harry Lavo wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
oups.com...

ScottW wrote:

snip


Check out all the MoFi Beatle Box sets on e-bay.
I see one with a single bid at $800....suspicious.

It sounds to me like that's possibly a shill bid, unless it's sealed.
Even then that seems high. But crazy stuff happens on eBay all the
time.


If it is only one bid, then that bid will be the initial bid the seller set.
It won't go higher unless there is a second bid.

Right, but if I set a very high price and then bid on it to make it
look like it's a reasonable price, or that somebody is actually
interested at that price, I'd still call that a shill bid. Maybe
"shill" isn't the correct term?

Looks like a bid to me. The bidder and seller have different
IDs. I see lots of stuff with no bids indicated and a starting
bid price. If the seller set a reserve...will the first bidders
offer run up to the reserve?

Here's the item
http://cgi.ebay.com/BEATLES-MOBILE-F...QQcmdZViewItem

It probably is a bid.

The thing that would make me more suspicious than the bidding pattern
is the "zero" feedback rating of the seller on an apparently high-end
item. I like dealing with people who have a proven track record when
using eBay on items that are several hundred dollars.

[[email protected]]

dizzy wrote:
Jenn wrote:

dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

No bias in your "childish statement" attack? LOL

Correct.

Wrong, obviously.

Most people would agree that answering a simple question how
you did is childish.

Most would agree that your question was stupid.

They would? I'll remember that if you ever have the curiosity to ask a
question about music.

It would only be fair turn-about, Jenn, if I were to, say, first
spout-off extensively regarding music, and then show that I didn't
even know what a scale was.

When did I "spout-off extensively" regarding the technical aspects of
audio?

You've spouted about sound quality from audio equipment, Jenn.

Arny simply gave a straightforward answer. I
appreciated that.

Great. You and Arny are real tight now, eh?

Many people judge each situation individually. Evidently, you don't.
You're entitled, I guess.

I recognize a fair-weather friend what I see one, Jenn.

Again, you're not making sense. Arny gave me a straight forward answer,
as opposed to you.

No "again" about it, Jenn. If you'd think harder you'd know that.

Most would agree that your statement is childish,

Most would agree you're an idiot.

Well, that ends this "discussion",

Looks like you can dish it out but cannot take it, Jenn.

I don't "dish out" things such as calling people on this board idiots.

So "childish" is okay, while "idiot" is not, eh Jenn?

You really don't understand the difference, do you?

I understand the two words are not synonymous, Jenn.

You really don't understand the difference is not significant to my
point, do you?

If you wish to do that, fine, but I have no desire to continue such a
discussion.

So you say, Jenn.

except for this observation:

You're going to "observe" a typo, Jenn? How childish.

"Think harder" Dizzy. That's not what I'm observing.

The fact is you did observe my typo, Jenn. If your real point was to
whine about something else, your observation of the typo, not
surprisingly, distracted from it. In short, it appears that your
communications skills need work Jenn.

LOL I'll do you a favor and explain this to you so you can avoid
twisting in the wind any further.

LOL the irony...

You commented on someone else's
intelligence, then misspelled a word. I was commenting on the fact that
this happens so often on the boards that it ought to be given a name,
not on your misspelling.

Whatever, Jenn. Your comment diverted from the point of the
discussion. Why not let the typo go? They happen all the time and
are not that interesting.

I'll do you a favor and explain THE REAL POINT to you so you can avoid
twisting in the wind any further.

Serious people, who spend serious time developing serious experiments
like ABX, do not generally have fatal flaws in their theory that any
idiot can shoot-down in 10 seconds by asking "why not? what are you
afraid of?"

You see, they realize that a theory can be shot-down with only one
counter-example. They spend time thinking of ways by which their
theory may be attacked. They attempt to close all possible attack
vectors. Having artificial restrictions like you can't "listen to the
same passage of music for as long a period as one wishes to" would
make their theory trivially attackable.

THAT is why I thought your question was rather foolish.

===========================

Mr. Dizzy says
Serious people, who spend serious time developing serious experiments
like ABX, do not generally have fatal flaws in their theory that any
idiot can shoot-down in 10 seconds by asking "why not? what are you
afraid of?"

PROVISO: All that follows applies to listening to audio components as
music reproduction instruments only. Audio research is beyond my scope,
interest/ competence

I dont't know who your "serious people" are. Some very serious peple
are still s
eriously looking for contacts with extraterrestrials or seriously
studying Rig-Veda or Kabbalah for clues how to vote. You can't just
"develop" serious experiments. You can only propose them. and then
perform them showing that your proposal WORKS. If you don't have the
facilities for such well designed, statistically valid, size and
diversity of the sample representative of the population you're
discussing, randomised- control/subject experimentation you submit your
hypothesis to others' opinion and/ or experimental confirmation /
falsification. Lots has been written on it beginning with the German/
Cambridge philosopher of science..Popper. I recommend you acquaint
yourself with the basics

There is another way. You have a bright idea, write it down for the web
and pop. mags and market a gimmick to perform it.. After that you're
off to the web races for the next 40 years.

Serious? Give me a break.
Ludovic Mirabel

[[email protected]]

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message


That will make Arny furious, and we
will get another month of ABX'sms.

Grow up, Harry. If it wasn't for Ludo and you whining all the time about
ABX, it would be mentioned here far less.

Yes, your huckstering would be much easier without exposure.
Ludovic Mirabel

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
oups.com...
ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Sander deWaal" wrote in message

Stewart Pinkerton: a Krell, and several other analogue
stuff.

Why is it snake oil?

Why would you buy a Krell for several thousands more than a Parasound
or a QSC?

Or does the Krell sound better? If no, then why wouldn't they be
considered "snake oil"?

If this is about Krell's ability to handle very low impedances, and if
the QSC and Parasound cannot operate with similar low impedances, then
aren't the QSC and Parasound not very well designed?

I'd say not as well designed. But how many amps "need" to be able to drive a
1
ohm load?

My point was to show old Arns his insanity and his inherent hypocrisy,
not to criticize Krell or anybody who owns one.

I have no problem with people buying Krell, or even Boulder for that
matter, if that's what suits them.:-)

Anyway, thats why I bought my KSA-150. I bought it used..unheard..on solid
recommendation that there isn't a finer SS amp to be had and it will drive
any
speaker. I knew I was going to be looking for new speakers and I wanted an
amp
that had no limitations. If it sounded better driving a benign load speaker
well, I guess that would have been a plus, but driving the Legacy's ....I
can't
say it does. But while some hi-end gear might get credit it isn't due, I
also
know some stuff that isn't in favor gets disrespect it doesn't deserve. I
think
people often lump Yamaha gear in one big pile of crappy mass market stuff
which
is grossly unfair. When I say I have a Mitsu linear TT, most think of the
POS
LT-5 and assume all Mitsu tables are likewise bad. People don't give my C-60
preamp any credit but I haven't heard a better SS preamp. It simply performs
IMO. So it all works both ways AFAIAC. At the end of the day, how much I
paid
for it...too little or too much, isn't what I'm thinking about when I turn it
on.

I agree with you. Further, I would add how much or how little that you
paid for your gear is none of my (or anybody else's) business. Nor is
it my business what brands you chose. If it helps you enjoy listening
to music, then it's perfect. Music is, after all, what it's all about
IMO.

I agree...but we all know that everyone on occasion likes to brag.
Some people like to brag about how much they spent and others
like to brag about how little they spent. I'm inclined toward the
latter.

As am I. I actually choose not to discuss my system here, as some will
think that I'm bragging, others will turn up their noses, and still
others may not agree with the choices that I've made. It makes me
happy, which is all that really matters, so screw 'em.

I'm actually on the "borg" side cables and wire, for example.

Me too. Unfortunately many people who are on the other side think they're
duty bound to convince you they're right....you know...like liberals and
politics .

I know it's hard to admit that you're wrong. Prediction: the Dems will
take power and the world will still turn...:-)

The shop where I got my Quads started pushing cables
on me...and I flat told 'em, "I'm not a cable guy". The owners reply, "We'll
change that." He's a nice guy, but now its really hard to talk to him.

If he continues to push them on you after you've said, "No, thanks."
I'd find a different dealer.

But
if you want to buy Tara Zero (and if it doesn't mean that you aren't
feeding your kids as a result), that's fine with me.

What are the odds that old Arns will ever agree with you, do you figure?

Ignore the usenet shtick and he's probably a lot closer to this
position than you realize.

So he's a dick on the Usenet about preference, but he really doesn't
believe what he says? While that's irrational, which would fit with his
insanity nicely, I disagree: I'd guess that he's just generally a
dick.:-)

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message


In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:


Again, when a listener presses a button on an ABX box,
the actual change may be A to A, A to B, B to A, or B to
B. If the change does not involve X, then it is very
critical that the listener know exactly what the
switchover involved. If the change involves X, then it
is very critical that the listener not know what the
switchover involved, except due to audible differences
between A and B.

Makes sense. I still don't buy into the need or
practicality of it on the consumer end, but what you
wrote makes sense.

It's all about what the consumer wants to know for himself based on his own
experiences. If the consumer doesn't want to hear the purported difference
for himself, then there's no need for any kind of listening test at all. If
the consumer does want to know if he can hear the purported difference or
not, then he needs to perform the test.

And that's what I mean about practicality. Let's face it: most people
just buy a boom box and set it on the kitchen counter. For those of us
who want something better, we do the best we can to find what sounds
good to us. Just as darn few people are going to do blind tests to see
what sugar substitute tastes most like sugar to them, most people are
going to trust their ears in audio.

[paul packer]

On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:54:24 -0800, "ScottW"
wrote:


I agree...but we all know that everyone on occasion likes to brag.
Some people like to brag about how much they spent and others
like to brag about how little they spent. I'm inclined toward the
latter.

Me too.

I'm actually on the "borg" side cables and wire, for example.

Me too.

Me too.

Unfortunately many people who are on the other side think they're
duty bound to convince you they're right....you know...like liberals and
politics . The shop where I got my Quads started pushing cables
on me...and I flat told 'em, "I'm not a cable guy". The owners reply, "We'll
change that." He's a nice guy, but now its really hard to talk to him.

I was in a HT store the other day. They had a demo of cables, with a
plasma set showing right side with lousy cables, left side with good
ones. I couldn't pick the difference, which probably means it was a
genuine demonstration. To me cables are the real snake oil. I have
never been able to pick any difference whatsoever between any cables
under any circumstances.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message


In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:


Again, when a listener presses a button on an ABX box,
the actual change may be A to A, A to B, B to A, or B
to B. If the change does not involve X, then it is
very critical that the listener know exactly what the
switchover involved. If the change involves X, then it
is very critical that the listener not know what the
switchover involved, except due to audible differences
between A and B.

Makes sense. I still don't buy into the need or
practicality of it on the consumer end, but what you
wrote makes sense.

It's all about what the consumer wants to know for
himself based on his own experiences. If the consumer
doesn't want to hear the purported difference for
himself, then there's no need for any kind of listening
test at all. If the consumer does want to know if he can
hear the purported difference or not, then he needs to
perform the test.

And that's what I mean about practicality. Let's face
it: most people just buy a boom box and set it on the
kitchen counter. For those of us who want something
better, we do the best we can to find what sounds good to
us. Just as darn few people are going to do blind tests
to see what sugar substitute tastes most like sugar to
them, most people are going to trust their ears in audio.

It is true that lesser minds are more easily satisifed with lesser answers,
sometimes to their detriment.

[Harry Lavo]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
message
oups.com...
ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
message
ups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Sander deWaal" wrote in message

Stewart Pinkerton: a Krell, and several other analogue
stuff.

Why is it snake oil?

Why would you buy a Krell for several thousands more than a
Parasound
or a QSC?

Or does the Krell sound better? If no, then why wouldn't they be
considered "snake oil"?

If this is about Krell's ability to handle very low impedances, and
if
the QSC and Parasound cannot operate with similar low impedances,
then
aren't the QSC and Parasound not very well designed?

I'd say not as well designed. But how many amps "need" to be able to
drive a
1
ohm load?

My point was to show old Arns his insanity and his inherent hypocrisy,
not to criticize Krell or anybody who owns one.

I have no problem with people buying Krell, or even Boulder for that
matter, if that's what suits them.:-)

Anyway, thats why I bought my KSA-150. I bought it used..unheard..on
solid
recommendation that there isn't a finer SS amp to be had and it will
drive
any
speaker. I knew I was going to be looking for new speakers and I
wanted an
amp
that had no limitations. If it sounded better driving a benign load
speaker
well, I guess that would have been a plus, but driving the Legacy's
....I
can't
say it does. But while some hi-end gear might get credit it isn't
due, I
also
know some stuff that isn't in favor gets disrespect it doesn't
deserve. I
think
people often lump Yamaha gear in one big pile of crappy mass market
stuff
which
is grossly unfair. When I say I have a Mitsu linear TT, most think
of the
POS
LT-5 and assume all Mitsu tables are likewise bad. People don't give
my C-60
preamp any credit but I haven't heard a better SS preamp. It simply
performs
IMO. So it all works both ways AFAIAC. At the end of the day, how
much I
paid
for it...too little or too much, isn't what I'm thinking about when I
turn it
on.

I agree with you. Further, I would add how much or how little that you
paid for your gear is none of my (or anybody else's) business. Nor is
it my business what brands you chose. If it helps you enjoy listening
to music, then it's perfect. Music is, after all, what it's all about
IMO.

I agree...but we all know that everyone on occasion likes to brag.
Some people like to brag about how much they spent and others
like to brag about how little they spent. I'm inclined toward the
latter.

As am I. I actually choose not to discuss my system here, as some will
think that I'm bragging, others will turn up their noses, and still
others may not agree with the choices that I've made. It makes me
happy, which is all that really matters, so screw 'em.

I'm going to take the risk of joining in to this conversation between you
two, as the topics interest me.

The only reason for describing a system (and the reason I occasionally do
it) is so other people can judge the basis of the discussion...mostly I do
so when describing the multichannel setup, or some aspect of imaging...where
people who have had experience (even if in a dealer showroom) can judge for
themselves the liklihood of it applying to their own setup. Or regarding
source material, especially SACDs or LP's, where there are questions about
the quality/neutrality of the source. Another reason is to identify
components that have proved especially troublesome, or exceptionally
reliable. And yet another reason is to illustrate where trade offs can be
made...such as my pushing the Sony C2000ES SACD player because of its
outstanding value for SACD purposes vs many other players. But bragging as
a status symbol has no place. And bragging about how little you paid (if
the equipment is worth only the same) opens you to redicule, so why would
anybody do it. IMO a quality system within the range of components
delivering quality sound and put together by second-hand purchases where
appropriate and first-hand purchases where appropriate is the "golden mean".
And from what I can judge, the way many, many audiophiles do it (at least
those of us with some years under our belts and especially those of us who
frequent these newsgroups).


I'm actually on the "borg" side cables and wire, for example.

Me too. Unfortunately many people who are on the other side think
they're
duty bound to convince you they're right....you know...like liberals and
politics .

It's amazing how stereotypes are pushed on usenet. For example, to Arny, I
am the quintessential "audiophool". Yet even without usenet help, my system
was populated with a combination of used Monster 1000ii interconnects
(purchased way back when my main source was the trading rag Audiomart) and
Radio Shack Gold interconnects. They are all good cables...but the average
cost is probably $40-50 a pair, and they make me happy. I have never bought
a green pen, or cd clarifier, or cable lifts, or cones. I have bought solid
things that make a difference, such as a Target wall rack for my turntable
and sorbothane feet for my mechanical equipment.


I know it's hard to admit that you're wrong. Prediction: the Dems will
take power and the world will still turn...:-)

The shop where I got my Quads started pushing cables
on me...and I flat told 'em, "I'm not a cable guy". The owners reply,
"We'll
change that." He's a nice guy, but now its really hard to talk to him.

If he continues to push them on you after you've said, "No, thanks."
I'd find a different dealer.

The dealers know that is where a lot of extra profit lies. For some, it may
make the difference to staying in business. So buyer beware. But also,
buyers can make up there own minds, and certainly they should demand return
privelege (especially on cables, which are not easily damaged and have the
margin to support a "used" mark-down) .


But
if you want to buy Tara Zero (and if it doesn't mean that you aren't
feeding your kids as a result), that's fine with me.

What are the odds that old Arns will ever agree with you, do you
figure?

Ignore the usenet shtick and he's probably a lot closer to this
position than you realize.

Some days I think so. I usually give him the benefit of the doubt. But
there are times when he does seem envy-driven.


So he's a dick on the Usenet about preference, but he really doesn't
believe what he says? While that's irrational, which would fit with his
insanity nicely, I disagree: I'd guess that he's just generally a
dick.:-)

Actually, he is much more reasonable on other newsgroups, especially when
among others who can technically challenge him. But his personal hang-ups
and abrasiveness generally show through eventually, so his reputation kind
of grows slowly as a "difficult" poster, albeit one with a fair degree of
technical savvy.

[George M. Middius]

The Krooborg huffs and puffs and wisps a bit of snot.

And that's what I mean about practicality. Let's face
it: most people just buy a boom box and set it on the
kitchen counter. For those of us who want something
better, we do the best we can to find what sounds good to
us. Just as darn few people are going to do blind tests
to see what sugar substitute tastes most like sugar to
them, most people are going to trust their ears in audio.

It is true that lesser minds are more easily satisifed with lesser answers,
sometimes to their detriment.

Still waiting for the details on all the happy consumers who have used
aBxism rituals to their benefit.... So far, the count stands at zero. At
least one citation would be nice, Arnii.





--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[Clyde Slick]

Jenn a scris:


Just as darn few people are going to do blind tests to see
what sugar substitute tastes most like sugar to them, most people are
going to trust their ears in audio.

Great point. I brought this up several years ago. When Arny comes up
with
some pcabx pages for and publishes his PCABX test results for several
brands each of
ketchup, mustard, canned soup, steak sauce, and thousand island
dressing,
I'll pay more attention to pcabx for music. If course, his pages must
contain digitized samples of Heinz ketchup, Hunt's ketchup, Cambell's
Select Minestrone soup, Progresso ministrone soup,
KEen's 1000 isle, Mafrie's 1000 isle, etc.
No need for on situs testing!!

[Sander deWaal]

"Harry Lavo" said:


That says something for that "cheap Parasound" (of course, almost
everything designed by John Curl is sounding good and built to last).


Except his old SOTA headamp (remember the one that looked like a black
can?). The sound of that baby was glassy, shallow, and way, way substandard
to the competition. It was hyped because it was Curl, but it wasn't good.


"Of course, ALMOST everything designed by John Curl is sounding good
and built to last."


--
- Ever seen someone with 5.1 ears? So, what does that tell you? -

[Harry Lavo]

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
"Harry Lavo" said:


That says something for that "cheap Parasound" (of course, almost
everything designed by John Curl is sounding good and built to last).


Except his old SOTA headamp (remember the one that looked like a black
can?). The sound of that baby was glassy, shallow, and way, way
substandard
to the competition. It was hyped because it was Curl, but it wasn't good.


"Of course, ALMOST everything designed by John Curl is sounding good
and built to last."

Sorry, I missed that.

Harry

[Sander deWaal]

MiNe 109 said:


Come to think of it, Pinkerton didn't compare his Krell to a Yamaha,
either.
It was a Parasound, IIRC.


Wasn't it an Audiolab?


Oh no. YES!!! ;-)


--
- Ever seen someone with 5.1 ears? So, what does that tell you? -

[ScottW]

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
. ..

"ScottW" wrote in message
...

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
. ..

"ScottW" wrote in message
...

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

Harry Lavo wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
message
oups.com...

ScottW wrote:

snip


Check out all the MoFi Beatle Box sets on e-bay.
I see one with a single bid at $800....suspicious.

It sounds to me like that's possibly a shill bid, unless it's sealed.
Even then that seems high. But crazy stuff happens on eBay all the
time.


If it is only one bid, then that bid will be the initial bid the seller
set.
It won't go higher unless there is a second bid.

Right, but if I set a very high price and then bid on it to make it
look like it's a reasonable price, or that somebody is actually
interested at that price, I'd still call that a shill bid. Maybe
"shill" isn't the correct term?

Looks like a bid to me. The bidder and seller have different
IDs. I see lots of stuff with no bids indicated and a starting
bid price. If the seller set a reserve...will the first bidders
offer run up to the reserve?

Here's the item
http://cgi.ebay.com/BEATLES-MOBILE-F...QQcmdZViewItem

http://tinyurl.com/yz8teu

Scott, here's how it works.

Seller sets the price...say $800, with "0" bids.

First bidder bids $1000....but with no other bidder, bid gets entered at
$800 (the seller minimum) and "1" bid recorded.

If a second bidder bids, let's say $900, his bid gets entered at $900, and
the first bidder "overbids" autiomatically at $910.00.

At that point, the screen says "$910.00, 3 bids" (first bid, second bid,
overbid (third) bid).

So I guess the sellers can set a min opening bid and a reserve
which aren't necessarily equal.

Yes the "shill" will often hang in for a round of bidding or two (automatic)
just to get things off to a fast start.


The first bidder may or may not be a shill. Listers don't "shill" using
their own ID...that would be a dead giveaway. If they are going to shill,
they either set up another account using slightly different "owner"
information, or better yet (or really, worse yet) this is usually done in
conjunction with a companion who is the one placing the "shill" bid.
Sometimes, unscrupulous sellers team up to "shill" one another.

BTW, I own one of these "limited edition" sets. Assumed it was worth
something...now I know how approximatley how much.

Ok, thanks for the explanation.

I've got a Japanese import box set. The mo-fi box is much better constructed.
Mine fell apart...but the records are great .
Still the bidding pattern is suspect as there appears to be similar offerings
for less.

Actually, there appear to be six or seven, and all but two are up around $800.
The even numbers do look a bit funny...on the other hand, there may be enough
of a market for the price to have been established, or there may be a couple
of bidders willing to pay that much for a christmas gift (given the talk about
the set on the various Beatle "Love" threads). The ones that are lower are
still days away from ending, and often the price will shoot up to "market"
with last minute bids.

The cheapest one with bids at $585 is closest to closing..6 hours.
The box looks a little dusty on that one so maybe thats why.
Factory sealed...buy it now for $1500 .
Are you planning to sell yours?

ScottW

[George M. Middius]

Harry Lavo said:

"Of course, ALMOST everything designed by John Curl is sounding good
and built to last."

Sorry, I missed that.

BZZZT! A true "debating trade" warrior does not admit error. The proper
"debating trade" response is to quibble about the meaning of "almost". One
"debating trade" definition of the word is "no reported exceptions".

Do you want to be universally despised or not, Harry? If you aspire to
"debating trade" masterhood, you must accept the mantle of loathsomeness
and wear it with burgeoning snottiness.





--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[dizzy]

wrote:

Serious? Give me a break.

Idiot.

[ScottW]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

ScottW wrote:
So I guess the sellers can set a min opening bid and a reserve
which aren't necessarily equal.

That's indeed true. The difference is that there is a fee based on your
listing price (say a few cents to a couple of bucks), with or without a
reserve.

If you list a reserve, however, you pay the other sellers fees as
though you actually sold it for that amount whether you got any bids or
not, plus the listing fee. If you list it without a reserve and don't
sell it, you're only out the listing fee.

Ok. Do you know how they work it for "buy it now" stuff with
no auctions? TIA.

ScottW

[ScottW]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

Harry Lavo wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
oups.com...

ScottW wrote:

snip


Check out all the MoFi Beatle Box sets on e-bay.
I see one with a single bid at $800....suspicious.

It sounds to me like that's possibly a shill bid, unless it's sealed.
Even then that seems high. But crazy stuff happens on eBay all the
time.


If it is only one bid, then that bid will be the initial bid the seller
set.
It won't go higher unless there is a second bid.

Right, but if I set a very high price and then bid on it to make it
look like it's a reasonable price, or that somebody is actually
interested at that price, I'd still call that a shill bid. Maybe
"shill" isn't the correct term?

Looks like a bid to me. The bidder and seller have different
IDs. I see lots of stuff with no bids indicated and a starting
bid price. If the seller set a reserve...will the first bidders
offer run up to the reserve?

Here's the item
http://cgi.ebay.com/BEATLES-MOBILE-F...QQcmdZViewItem

It probably is a bid.

The thing that would make me more suspicious than the bidding pattern
is the "zero" feedback rating of the seller on an apparently high-end
item. I like dealing with people who have a proven track record when
using eBay on items that are several hundred dollars.

Yeah...but then they're likely dealers instead of original owner.
Does paypal offer escrow service?
I bought my Legacy's off RAM and it was one of the most nerve wracking
deals. Everything (like shipping insurance) is geared to
protecting the shipper, not the buyer.
So I tried to setup myself as shipper and that was a real PIA.
Finally managed it through a freight company, Shannon Express.
They did a great job with packing, domestic pickup and delivery
and exactly on schedule. Said they'd be at my house between
noon and 1 PM, and they were in my drive at 12 sharp.

ScottW

[ScottW]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
oups.com...
ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Sander deWaal" wrote in message

Stewart Pinkerton: a Krell, and several other analogue
stuff.

Why is it snake oil?

Why would you buy a Krell for several thousands more than a Parasound
or a QSC?

Or does the Krell sound better? If no, then why wouldn't they be
considered "snake oil"?

If this is about Krell's ability to handle very low impedances, and if
the QSC and Parasound cannot operate with similar low impedances, then
aren't the QSC and Parasound not very well designed?

I'd say not as well designed. But how many amps "need" to be able to drive
a
1
ohm load?

My point was to show old Arns his insanity and his inherent hypocrisy,
not to criticize Krell or anybody who owns one.

I have no problem with people buying Krell, or even Boulder for that
matter, if that's what suits them.:-)

Anyway, thats why I bought my KSA-150. I bought it used..unheard..on
solid
recommendation that there isn't a finer SS amp to be had and it will drive
any
speaker. I knew I was going to be looking for new speakers and I wanted
an
amp
that had no limitations. If it sounded better driving a benign load
speaker
well, I guess that would have been a plus, but driving the Legacy's ....I
can't
say it does. But while some hi-end gear might get credit it isn't due, I
also
know some stuff that isn't in favor gets disrespect it doesn't deserve. I
think
people often lump Yamaha gear in one big pile of crappy mass market stuff
which
is grossly unfair. When I say I have a Mitsu linear TT, most think of
the
POS
LT-5 and assume all Mitsu tables are likewise bad. People don't give my
C-60
preamp any credit but I haven't heard a better SS preamp. It simply
performs
IMO. So it all works both ways AFAIAC. At the end of the day, how much I
paid
for it...too little or too much, isn't what I'm thinking about when I turn
it
on.

I agree with you. Further, I would add how much or how little that you
paid for your gear is none of my (or anybody else's) business. Nor is
it my business what brands you chose. If it helps you enjoy listening
to music, then it's perfect. Music is, after all, what it's all about
IMO.

I agree...but we all know that everyone on occasion likes to brag.
Some people like to brag about how much they spent and others
like to brag about how little they spent. I'm inclined toward the
latter.

As am I. I actually choose not to discuss my system here, as some will
think that I'm bragging, others will turn up their noses, and still
others may not agree with the choices that I've made. It makes me
happy, which is all that really matters, so screw 'em.

Thats too bad. I like to hear about peoples systems..what they've had
and what they've got now and why. What upgrades worked and what
didn't. Thats the most useful kind of input
a person can have when they've got the itch.
Only system I've ever heard mention here that made me truly envious
was someones surround on MBL 101s...and I've never even heard MBLs .


I'm actually on the "borg" side cables and wire, for example.

Me too. Unfortunately many people who are on the other side think they're
duty bound to convince you they're right....you know...like liberals and
politics .

I know it's hard to admit that you're wrong. Prediction: the Dems will
take power and the world will still turn...:-)

I think even the dems realize the limits to their powers.


The shop where I got my Quads started pushing cables
on me...and I flat told 'em, "I'm not a cable guy". The owners reply, "We'll
change that." He's a nice guy, but now its really hard to talk to him.

If he continues to push them on you after you've said, "No, thanks."
I'd find a different dealer.

Not many options. I liked them cuz they sell a lot of used stuff.
I don't like to waste a dealers time with auditions if I'm not ready to
buy.


But
if you want to buy Tara Zero (and if it doesn't mean that you aren't
feeding your kids as a result), that's fine with me.

What are the odds that old Arns will ever agree with you, do you figure?

Ignore the usenet shtick and he's probably a lot closer to this
position than you realize.

So he's a dick on the Usenet about preference,

Breaks into 2 areas. He's a dick about people who
prefer vinyl. But he's a bigger dick to people who try
to justify their preference with questionable technical
claims....like infinite resolution of analog etc.

but he really doesn't
believe what he says?

Occasionally he is clearly trolling. What I don't understand
is why so many take his bait?

ScottW

[George M. Middius]

dippyborg loses it.

Serious? Give me a break.

Idiot.

aBxism is deadly serious. That's what Dr. Not tells us, anyway. What could
be more serious than investing 80 hours and spending $400 in order to
compare a $300 amp to a $900 amp? And since we know in advance that aBxism
rituals inevitably make everything sound the same, anybody who undertakes
the rituals does so as an act of religious faith. This makes perfect sense
to me, as indeed it should to anybody who's not completely hung up on a
quaint human definition of science.




--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[Harry Lavo]

"ScottW" wrote in message
...

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
. ..

"ScottW" wrote in message
...

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
. ..

"ScottW" wrote in message
...

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
message ups.com...

Harry Lavo wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
message
oups.com...

ScottW wrote:

snip


Check out all the MoFi Beatle Box sets on e-bay.
I see one with a single bid at $800....suspicious.

It sounds to me like that's possibly a shill bid, unless it's
sealed.
Even then that seems high. But crazy stuff happens on eBay all the
time.


If it is only one bid, then that bid will be the initial bid the
seller set.
It won't go higher unless there is a second bid.

Right, but if I set a very high price and then bid on it to make it
look like it's a reasonable price, or that somebody is actually
interested at that price, I'd still call that a shill bid. Maybe
"shill" isn't the correct term?

Looks like a bid to me. The bidder and seller have different
IDs. I see lots of stuff with no bids indicated and a starting
bid price. If the seller set a reserve...will the first bidders
offer run up to the reserve?

Here's the item
http://cgi.ebay.com/BEATLES-MOBILE-F...QQcmdZViewItem

http://tinyurl.com/yz8teu

Scott, here's how it works.

Seller sets the price...say $800, with "0" bids.

First bidder bids $1000....but with no other bidder, bid gets entered
at $800 (the seller minimum) and "1" bid recorded.

If a second bidder bids, let's say $900, his bid gets entered at $900,
and the first bidder "overbids" autiomatically at $910.00.

At that point, the screen says "$910.00, 3 bids" (first bid, second
bid, overbid (third) bid).

So I guess the sellers can set a min opening bid and a reserve
which aren't necessarily equal.

Yes the "shill" will often hang in for a round of bidding or two
(automatic) just to get things off to a fast start.


The first bidder may or may not be a shill. Listers don't "shill"
using their own ID...that would be a dead giveaway. If they are going
to shill, they either set up another account using slightly different
"owner" information, or better yet (or really, worse yet) this is
usually done in conjunction with a companion who is the one placing the
"shill" bid. Sometimes, unscrupulous sellers team up to "shill" one
another.

BTW, I own one of these "limited edition" sets. Assumed it was worth
something...now I know how approximatley how much.

Ok, thanks for the explanation.

I've got a Japanese import box set. The mo-fi box is much better
constructed.
Mine fell apart...but the records are great .
Still the bidding pattern is suspect as there appears to be similar
offerings
for less.

Actually, there appear to be six or seven, and all but two are up around
$800. The even numbers do look a bit funny...on the other hand, there may
be enough of a market for the price to have been established, or there
may be a couple of bidders willing to pay that much for a christmas gift
(given the talk about the set on the various Beatle "Love" threads). The
ones that are lower are still days away from ending, and often the price
will shoot up to "market" with last minute bids.

The cheapest one with bids at $585 is closest to closing..6 hours.
The box looks a little dusty on that one so maybe thats why.
Factory sealed...buy it now for $1500 .
Are you planning to sell yours?

ScottW

I wasn't. Besides, pre-Christmas would probably be the best time, and that
time is nearly past.

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message
.
com

In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:


Again, when a listener presses a button on an ABX box,
the actual change may be A to A, A to B, B to A, or B
to B. If the change does not involve X, then it is
very critical that the listener know exactly what the
switchover involved. If the change involves X, then it
is very critical that the listener not know what the
switchover involved, except due to audible differences
between A and B.

Makes sense. I still don't buy into the need or
practicality of it on the consumer end, but what you
wrote makes sense.

It's all about what the consumer wants to know for
himself based on his own experiences. If the consumer
doesn't want to hear the purported difference for
himself, then there's no need for any kind of listening
test at all. If the consumer does want to know if he can
hear the purported difference or not, then he needs to
perform the test.

And that's what I mean about practicality. Let's face
it: most people just buy a boom box and set it on the
kitchen counter. For those of us who want something
better, we do the best we can to find what sounds good to
us. Just as darn few people are going to do blind tests
to see what sugar substitute tastes most like sugar to
them, most people are going to trust their ears in audio.

It is true that lesser minds are more easily satisifed with lesser answers,
sometimes to their detriment.

So you do dbt on sugar substitutes?, or do you have a lesser mind? You
buy sound unheard and untested online: do you have a lesser mind? ;-)

[Jenn]

In article ,
dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

No bias in your "childish statement" attack? LOL

Correct.

Wrong, obviously.

Most people would agree that answering a simple question how
you did is childish.

Most would agree that your question was stupid.

They would? I'll remember that if you ever have the curiosity to ask a
question about music.

It would only be fair turn-about, Jenn, if I were to, say, first
spout-off extensively regarding music, and then show that I didn't
even know what a scale was.

When did I "spout-off extensively" regarding the technical aspects of
audio?

You've spouted about sound quality from audio equipment, Jenn.

Note the title of the group.

Is giving an opinion "spouting"?


Arny simply gave a straightforward answer. I
appreciated that.

Great. You and Arny are real tight now, eh?

Many people judge each situation individually. Evidently, you don't.
You're entitled, I guess.

I recognize a fair-weather friend what I see one, Jenn.

Again, you're not making sense. Arny gave me a straight forward answer,
as opposed to you.

No "again" about it, Jenn. If you'd think harder you'd know that.

Most would agree that your statement is childish,

Most would agree you're an idiot.

Well, that ends this "discussion",

Looks like you can dish it out but cannot take it, Jenn.

I don't "dish out" things such as calling people on this board idiots.

So "childish" is okay, while "idiot" is not, eh Jenn?

You really don't understand the difference, do you?

I understand the two words are not synonymous, Jenn.

You really don't understand the difference is not significant to my
point, do you?

You understand why one is appropriate and one is not, don't you?


If you wish to do that, fine, but I have no desire to continue such a
discussion.

So you say, Jenn.

except for this observation:

You're going to "observe" a typo, Jenn? How childish.

"Think harder" Dizzy. That's not what I'm observing.

The fact is you did observe my typo, Jenn. If your real point was to
whine about something else, your observation of the typo, not
surprisingly, distracted from it. In short, it appears that your
communications skills need work Jenn.

LOL I'll do you a favor and explain this to you so you can avoid
twisting in the wind any further.

LOL the irony...

Hardly.


You commented on someone else's
intelligence, then misspelled a word. I was commenting on the fact that
this happens so often on the boards that it ought to be given a name,
not on your misspelling.

Whatever, Jenn.

Well, there you go.

Your comment diverted from the point of the
discussion. Why not let the typo go? They happen all the time and
are not that interesting.

I quite agree. But it wasn't a typo; it was a misspelling done in the
same paragraph where you commented on someone's intelligence. Do you
see the irony in that? It's the irony that is interesting, not the
misspelling. Misspellings happen all the time, including by me.


I'll do you a favor and explain THE REAL POINT to you so you can avoid
twisting in the wind any further.

lol


Serious people, who spend serious time developing serious experiments
like ABX, do not generally have fatal flaws in their theory that any
idiot can shoot-down in 10 seconds by asking "why not? what are you
afraid of?"

You see, they realize that a theory can be shot-down with only one
counter-example. They spend time thinking of ways by which their
theory may be attacked. They attempt to close all possible attack
vectors. Having artificial restrictions like you can't "listen to the
same passage of music for as long a period as one wishes to" would
make their theory trivially attackable.

THAT is why I thought your question was rather foolish.

You obviously don't understand the cognitive processes used in musical
perception. Read the work of some "serious people" such as those at the
journal "Music Perception" (University of CA Press).

[[email protected]]

dizzy wrote:
wrote:

Serious? Give me a break.

Idiot.

====================

Apologies for upsetting you. I truly tried to make it simple but I can
see that my communication efforts would reach the stone age men but not
the ages before. .
Regards Ludovic Mirabel

[[email protected]]

Jenn wrote:
In article ,
dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

dizzy wrote:

Jenn wrote:

No bias in your "childish statement" attack? LOL

Correct.

Wrong, obviously.

Most people would agree that answering a simple question how
you did is childish.

Most would agree that your question was stupid.

They would? I'll remember that if you ever have the curiosity to ask a
question about music.

It would only be fair turn-about, Jenn, if I were to, say, first
spout-off extensively regarding music, and then show that I didn't
even know what a scale was.

When did I "spout-off extensively" regarding the technical aspects of
audio?

You've spouted about sound quality from audio equipment, Jenn.

Note the title of the group.

Is giving an opinion "spouting"?


Arny simply gave a straightforward answer. I
appreciated that.

Great. You and Arny are real tight now, eh?

Many people judge each situation individually. Evidently, you don't.
You're entitled, I guess.

I recognize a fair-weather friend what I see one, Jenn.

Again, you're not making sense. Arny gave me a straight forward answer,
as opposed to you.

No "again" about it, Jenn. If you'd think harder you'd know that.

Most would agree that your statement is childish,

Most would agree you're an idiot.

Well, that ends this "discussion",

Looks like you can dish it out but cannot take it, Jenn.

I don't "dish out" things such as calling people on this board idiots.

So "childish" is okay, while "idiot" is not, eh Jenn?

You really don't understand the difference, do you?

I understand the two words are not synonymous, Jenn.

You really don't understand the difference is not significant to my
point, do you?

You understand why one is appropriate and one is not, don't you?


If you wish to do that, fine, but I have no desire to continue such a
discussion.

So you say, Jenn.

except for this observation:

You're going to "observe" a typo, Jenn? How childish.

"Think harder" Dizzy. That's not what I'm observing.

The fact is you did observe my typo, Jenn. If your real point was to
whine about something else, your observation of the typo, not
surprisingly, distracted from it. In short, it appears that your
communications skills need work Jenn.

LOL I'll do you a favor and explain this to you so you can avoid
twisting in the wind any further.

LOL the irony...

Hardly.


You commented on someone else's
intelligence, then misspelled a word. I was commenting on the fact that
this happens so often on the boards that it ought to be given a name,
not on your misspelling.

Whatever, Jenn.

Well, there you go.

Your comment diverted from the point of the
discussion. Why not let the typo go? They happen all the time and
are not that interesting.

I quite agree. But it wasn't a typo; it was a misspelling done in the
same paragraph where you commented on someone's intelligence. Do you
see the irony in that? It's the irony that is interesting, not the
misspelling. Misspellings happen all the time, including by me.


I'll do you a favor and explain THE REAL POINT to you so you can avoid
twisting in the wind any further.

lol


Serious people, who spend serious time developing serious experiments
like ABX, do not generally have fatal flaws in their theory that any
idiot can shoot-down in 10 seconds by asking "why not? what are you
afraid of?"

You see, they realize that a theory can be shot-down with only one
counter-example. They spend time thinking of ways by which their
theory may be attacked. They attempt to close all possible attack
vectors. Having artificial restrictions like you can't "listen to the
same passage of music for as long a period as one wishes to" would
make their theory trivially attackable.

THAT is why I thought your question was rather foolish.

You obviously don't understand the cognitive processes used in musical
perception. Read the work of some "serious people" such as those at the
journal "Music Perception" (University of CA Press).

=================================================

Jenn says to Mr.Dizzy :

You obviously don't understand the cognitive processes used in musical
perception. Read the work of some "serious people" such as those at the
journal "Music Perception" (University of CA Press).

Jenn, you tell Mr. Dizzy to read an esoteric Journal just after I sent
him to read Karl Popper. It ain't fair: who do you think he is? He is
not an academic, he is a faithful RAO contributor and a representative
chapel member.
Sending him to basic sources , you after me, is mental cruelty, It is a
witchhunt of a pantomine witch. No wonde he gets a bit unhinged and
produces witty one liners like "idiot" in reply.
I'm the second dizzy-nominated idiot after you. Can't wait to read his
next selection..
Ludovic Mirabel

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in
message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message


And that's what I mean about practicality. Let's face
it: most people just buy a boom box and set it on the
kitchen counter. For those of us who want something
better, we do the best we can to find what sounds good
to us. Just as darn few people are going to do blind
tests to see what sugar substitute tastes most like
sugar to them, most people are going to trust their
ears in audio.

It is true that lesser minds are more easily satisifed
with lesser answers, sometimes to their detriment.

So you do dbt on sugar substitutes?,

Don't use them.

You buy sound unheard and untested online:

So what?

do you have a lesser mind? ;-)

Irrelevant.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

Harry Lavo wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
oups.com...

ScottW wrote:

snip


Check out all the MoFi Beatle Box sets on e-bay.
I see one with a single bid at $800....suspicious.

It sounds to me like that's possibly a shill bid, unless it's sealed.
Even then that seems high. But crazy stuff happens on eBay all the
time.


If it is only one bid, then that bid will be the initial bid the seller
set.
It won't go higher unless there is a second bid.

Right, but if I set a very high price and then bid on it to make it
look like it's a reasonable price, or that somebody is actually
interested at that price, I'd still call that a shill bid. Maybe
"shill" isn't the correct term?

Looks like a bid to me. The bidder and seller have different
IDs. I see lots of stuff with no bids indicated and a starting
bid price. If the seller set a reserve...will the first bidders
offer run up to the reserve?

Here's the item
http://cgi.ebay.com/BEATLES-MOBILE-F...QQcmdZViewItem

It probably is a bid.

The thing that would make me more suspicious than the bidding pattern
is the "zero" feedback rating of the seller on an apparently high-end
item. I like dealing with people who have a proven track record when
using eBay on items that are several hundred dollars.

Yeah...but then they're likely dealers instead of original owner.

Not true. I'm not a dealer and my feedback is several hundred. You can
get feedback when you buy or sell. So if I buy something or sell
something, I can get feedback (not everybody is courteous enough to
leave it. I have several hundred more transactions than that. Also, if
I buy from someone again, only one of their feedbacks count to my
total.).

Does paypal offer escrow service?

I think so. I've never used it. I think Paypal also offers some buyers
protections. I've only been 'had' a couple of times for pretty small
amounts, so overall it's been a good way to find things for me.

I bought my Legacy's off RAM and it was one of the most nerve wracking
deals. Everything (like shipping insurance) is geared to
protecting the shipper, not the buyer.
So I tried to setup myself as shipper and that was a real PIA.
Finally managed it through a freight company, Shannon Express.
They did a great job with packing, domestic pickup and delivery
and exactly on schedule. Said they'd be at my house between
noon and 1 PM, and they were in my drive at 12 sharp.

Freight companies tend to cost more, but for a heavy item it probably
comes out in the wash.

I've had multiple dealings (buy or sell items) with several people from
Germany, Australia, The Netherlands, France, Morocco, Japan, China,
Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Russia, Italy, the UK,
Canada, Switzerland, New Zealand, Hong Kong, nearly all 50 states, and
more. As I said, I've had two bad experiences. One of those was a guy
in New York. He later bid on something I was selling and it went fine.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...

ScottW wrote:
So I guess the sellers can set a min opening bid and a reserve
which aren't necessarily equal.

That's indeed true. The difference is that there is a fee based on your
listing price (say a few cents to a couple of bucks), with or without a
reserve.

If you list a reserve, however, you pay the other sellers fees as
though you actually sold it for that amount whether you got any bids or
not, plus the listing fee. If you list it without a reserve and don't
sell it, you're only out the listing fee.

Ok. Do you know how they work it for "buy it now" stuff with
no auctions? TIA.

Listing price plus sellers fees for the BIN, I think.

I think if it's a straight auction with BIN, the BIN diappears after a
bid has been placed. I never use BIN. If I'm selling something, it's
always a straight auction.

All their seller's fee terms are here. Note the options, like BIN,
lower on the page:

http://pages.ebay.com/help/sell/fees.html